Liam Fox and the worst secret trade stitch up you've never heard of

The EU/US 'TTIP trade deal' is dead - but another deal that will do similar damage to our public services and protections is almost in place already. And the socialists are split...

Image: International Trade Secretary Liam Fox. Rights: Chatham House

Lifting
our last remaining restrictions on privatisation. Secret corporate
courts. You
can
see
why Greens have always characterised deals
like TTIP and CETA
as less of a ‘trade
treaty’ and more of a corporate power grab.

The
irony that I am writing this post for Open Democracy is not lost on
me. Trade treaties in general, and CETA - the Comprehensive Economic
and Trade Agreement - in particular are a classic case of decisions
being made behind closed doors and with information being withheld
even from elected members of Parliament.

The
election of Trump and the UK vote to leave the EU has blown a massive
whole in conventional trade policy.

But
what an irony faces those on the Left who voted to leave the EU
because
of TTIP and now find they are fast-tracked into a very similartreaty
kindly offered by Trump, even
as TTIP dies!

(Cecilia
Malmstrom, the Trade Commissioner, admitted before Christmas that
TTIP
is
‘pining for the fjords’!)

For
a more detailed glimpse into what the future of the UK’s trading
relations (and the style of their negotiation) could look like, check
out the nearly finalised CETA (the EU/Canadian ‘trade’ deal).
Liam Fox has quietly decided, without proper parliamentary scrutiny or any debate in parliament, that this deal will apply to us
regardless of Brexit. Fox did manage to apologise to a
disgruntled parliamentary committee for the ‘scrutiny override’,
claiminghe had been befuddled by the ‘jobs, investment
and prosperity’ the Treaty would (not) create.

So
much for taking back control.

Instead
we’ve been quietly and undemocratically saddled with a deal which
jeopardises many of our hard-won protections – health,
environmental, workers rights – not to mention our public services.

Perhaps
most damagingly, CETA includes a proposal for an Investment Court
System - a minor revision of the proposal for private, corporate
courts that were the downfall of the TTIP treaty. It
is clear that the arbitration courts for investors are not only
undemocratic, they are also incompatible with European standards for
a fair justice system. We need to end this special treatment for
multinational companies, and the parliamentary scrutiny and vote on
CETA should give us the chance to do this.

While
concerns about the future of public services worry many across
Europe, CETA has launched us in a direction that could further
undermine them. For the first time, all services will be subject to
a liberalised trade system unless explicitly excluded in writing, under
what they call a ‘negative list’ approach. Previously, EU trade
deals liberalised only what was specifically listed and agreed by
national governments. Now any service, public or otherwise, that
comes into being in the future, will be automatically liberalised,
thereby severely limiting our governments’ ability to bring a
service back under public control. In a reportcalled Public
Services Under Attacka
group of European NGOs make clear how this process turbo-charges and
then sets in stone the process of privatisation:

‘A
very limited general exemption only exists for services “supplied
in the exercise of governmental authority”. But to qualify for this
exemption, a service has to be carried out “neither on a commercial
basis nor in competition with one or more economic operators”. Yet
nowadays, in virtually all traditional public sectors, private
companies exist alongside public suppliers – often resulting in
fierce competition between the two. This effectively limits the
governmental authority exemption to a few core sovereign functions
such as law enforcement, the judiciary, or the services of a central
bank.’

There
is no surprise that negotiators do not want politicians or those they
serve to know what is going on, because the agreements they are
reaching blatantly advance the interests of the corporations who have
been so busy lobbying for them.

So
where’s the political fight-back? The
Green Group has been at the forefront of battling CETA and we are
still the leading opponents now it has reached the stage of being
ratified – or not – by the European Parliament. This process began on
21 November and in an extreme acceleration of the normal process it
was proposed that we vote on it in December! As part of the same
stitch-up we are being deprived of a debate and a resolution and will
only have a chance to vote Yes or No. Meanwhile consultation with
national parliaments has been reduced to a single lunch meeting with
one representative from each country’s parliament. Hardly the
rigorous scrutiny we might expect for a treaty with such far-reaching
consequences.

The
Greens managed to ensure that a number of committees could give
written opinions on CETA, so MEPs had the chance to explore
some of its content fully before we are asked to vote. Back in
December, the employment committee votedto
reject CETA because of the threat it
poses to employment rights.

Earlier
this month the opinion in the environment committee saw the
socialists split down the middle, with
many ignoring Green
concerns about threats that EU law on chemicals, pesticides, animal
welfare, food safety and climate protection may all be watered down.

Bart
Staes, who wrote the opinion, was clear that:

‘[The
Commission] has undermined the EU fuel quality directive to allow
Canada to export fuel from dirty tar sands, and now even proposes to
unlawfully modify provisions on endocrine disrupters in pesticide
law. The Commission has acted in the interests of Canadian companies
by refraining from banning cyanide in mining despite the European
Parliament
calling for a ban, and by recently authorising
the use of carcinogenic substances in paints (lead chromates) even
though EU companies use safer alternatives’

The
agriculture committee may not even give a view, despite the treaty
having deeply troubling implications for Europe’s farmers. CETA
includes the dropping of tariffs on 97% of products, including on
most agricultural products, so as MEP for the South West England this
concerns me greatly. The likelihood is that we will see our markets
flooded with poor-quality North American food, stuffed with hormones
and modified genes, from mega-farms that destroy environments, family
farms and rural communities.

As
Greens we have been battering CETA for years but it limps along. To
deal the killer blow we would need the whole-hearted support of the
socialists in the Parliament.

Sadly,
they have been ambivalent at best. With so much heat on this issue at
home, most Labour MEPs are now voting against committee opinions on
CETA - but they are not bringing their European socialist colleagues
with them.

The
European Parliament is now the last chance of blocking this damaging
assault on democratic power. But without solid opposition from the
socialists in the Parliament it is likely that CETA will be passed in
February. As the vote in the Environment Committee showed, they are
now divided. We need Jeremy Corbyn to keep true to his rhetorical
opposition to CETA and to instruct his MEPs to vote it down. And
please do what you can by making a noise about CETA and by letting
your MEPs know that you want them to vote against the ratification of
this damaging and anti-democratic treaty.

About the author

Molly Scott Cato is Green MEP for the South West of England. She is Green Party speaker on finance and was formerly Professor of Strategy and Sustainability at the University of Roehampton.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.
If you have any queries about republishing please contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.